audio1471024050

The speaker discusses the current situation in Chennai and expresses concern about the upcoming months. They mention that there are no water issues due to previous rainfall. The discussion then shifts to the mandate of the directors' and senior management teams and the need for more structure in their meetings. They also talk about the importance of detailed meeting minutes and the need to prioritize action points. The speaker mentions upcoming events and workshops, particularly one focused on the potential of BRSR in holding corporations accountable for working conditions. They also mention a cancelled handbook launch event. Chennai How bad is it in Chennai? You don't have to make a guess, Deepika. I mean, it's sweltering. Yeah, I mean, we are worried about May and June, because it's kind of an early... It looks like, I think, like, early peak summer now. So, next two months, I'm really concerned. But fortunately, there's no issue with the water this time, because last time we had good rain, so the reservoirs are, yeah, good storage. Sorry, let's start. So, all of you have had the time to look at the previous meeting minutes. I think I will combine the first two agenda points to just sort of discuss all of it together. So, what has happened also in the last few days has been that, I mean, we did bring this up in various forums, but I'm not sure if every one of you was aware, that we decided that the directors' meeting should also happen on a monthly basis. And so, we did have one early this week, and what we started off there was to try and figure out what is the mandate of the directors' team, and then, hence, what is the mandate of the senior management team. We've had a number of meetings, and I think whatever's been on the top of our minds, we've kind of brought it up and discussed in this meeting, which has been helpful, but probably also a little bit unstructured. So, to try and define the mandate of this team as well as the other sort of management team, that is the directors' team, we'll try and send out maybe some points for review soon. But if there are thoughts on what the senior management team could do already, that would be helpful to us in creating the first draft. Yeah, so I'm starting with that because then if you can look at the previous meeting minutes also in that light. As a manager, of course, residency has tried to capture all the details. Whether that level of detail helps, because if it helps you all in kind of keeping track of what are the action points, et cetera, we can continue doing this. But my feeling is also that a lot of the meetings are just adding to our list, and we are actually not getting time to do any of the actions within that list. So, what could be a good sort of a way to have the senior management team meeting, which is sort of, I mean, not going into the details of projects, but looking at overall managing of projects, but that is not the only piece. There is also management of fundraising. There is also management of communications, management of administration. So, there are various aspects that require the managing, and that is why I think this diverse group then holds the sort of mandate to have discussions on that as well as take some decisions. Yeah, so, I mean, if we can look at the meeting minutes or if there are immediate thoughts in your mind about what could be the possible mandates and directions for this team to take. Can we look at the minutes? You want me to share it? Yeah, I mean, for a little while at least. I'll send it to you later. Maybe we can forward this to you. And you're able to view. So, this was way back in January, and we haven't had, I don't think we've had a meeting since then. Okay, I'll just quickly jump through the minutes to view. So, this is from the meeting before this one, and I'm not sure if this kind of fits this meeting, right? I mean, should we be discussing about project and event details here? Possibly important key ones, but which need, like, more resources or more management time. Yeah, I mean, what will be helpful is to not go through every point, you know, but just have an overview and say, okay, most of them have been done, and then these are the remaining issues. So, though we all have a copy of these minutes, you know, it might be, to set the context, it might be useful to just say if there is anything that is not moving or stuck, you know. Yeah, okay. And I think that this level of details is required. Because where else does the discussion figure? Correct. Because I think this level of details are very useful for review, planning, you know. Yeah. Deco suggests that we can do an event calendar in the end, and she can update us about what's coming up immediately, and we can have a discussion then. So, can we leave this for the last? I don't know, what would help? I mean, like, having an event calendar, upcoming events, you know, next month, whatever. Would it help having, like, an event calendar? Yeah, I mean, that would be useful, too. You know, but then there are issues where it may not be an event, you know. There might be something else. You know, if it is fundraising and all, it may not be an event. So, there will be different kinds of things, you know, where things may not be moving for some specific issues, which we might want to discuss in the SMT further, you know. If there is some lack of clarity or some challenging situation, you know. So, events is one addition, which will be very useful. At least now we have a picture of what's coming up. Okay, so we might not get the time. You know, the three-day residential. Yes. So, then quickly, I think, from my side, on the event calendar, what is coming up is the three-day workshop under the UNDP project on 16th, 17th, and 18th. It is also kind of, in a way, linked to the Fair Finance event that happened, you know, on 21st. Just to kind of give a very, very quick debrief on the Fair Finance event, we developed a policy brief on what is the potential of non-financial disclosures, such as the BRSR, to hold corporates accountable, where working conditions are concerned in value chains. So, I think we got very good comments for the policy brief itself, but there was a larger interest on BRSR. What is the potential of BRSR? One, to hold corporations accountable for working conditions. Our focus was on labor. There were also other people, you know, focused on sustainable finance, as well as, you know, environment, people interested, you know, in furthering holding corporations accountable for environment. But we squarely focused on labor issues, and we specifically looked at wages, informality, gender pay gap, and freedom of association. So, there was a larger interest in developing, in using BRSR to, you know, to kind of hold corporations accountable for, you know, better working conditions in value chain. And there was a larger discussion on whether BRSR itself can be developed as a due diligence mechanism in India. Right now, only the top 1,000 listed companies are reporting on BRSR. But there was discussion on how to expand this, how to, you know, kind of ensure that the list can be, it can be covered, you know, more companies other than the top 1,000 listed companies can be included. And, you know, can it then be developed into a due diligence framework within India? So, I think that kind of a discussion, you know, kind of elicited very good, you know, responses from the audience. And I think one question for Sivadev is, is there potential for us to do more work on BRSR? We don't have to discuss it right away, but we can come back to this. What kind of work can we do on BRSR? And look at, you know, these efforts that we are doing, and can we raise funds? That would be the, you know, next question. But overall, it was a, it was a, it was a good event where, you know, with a good set of participants and interest in BRSR itself. Okay, even if you also, what we are, the, what we are trying to do is we are trying to, trying to deep dive into BRSR itself. Really look at the questionnaire. One is look at how it evolved as a response to, you know, various, you know, international mechanisms that require India also to kind of align towards responsible business conduct. So, we will kind of look at the evolution of BRSR. But the majority of the, you know, one and a half days, we will kind of deep dive into what is the questionnaire? What are the questions on key labor aspects? Where to pick up this data? You know, where is it accessible? How to kind of break it down? And how to, you know, create a basic analysis. So, this is the kind of deep diving we will do in the two days. And we will also look at examples of the government sector and possibly electronics and leather as case studies. And we will also kind of allow the participants, you know, to kind of do an analysis of one or two companies themselves. And the last day, the third day, will be a strategic discussion again on how can we leverage the BRSR? How can, you know, and what is, how is this data, how does it add to existing public data? Whether it's the periodic labor force survey or the ASI, how does the BRSR add? And how can we, you know, kind of use all of this publicly available data to kind of, you know, improve working conditions and supply chain? So, this is the overall program. I will, of course, ask Nandita to share the detailed agenda with everyone. I think our coordinators are attending. We have included them. All coordinators are participating. It would be good to know if anyone from the senior management would also like to kind of join the three-day workshop. The event launch of the handbook is canceled for now. We'd like to kind of do it on a later date. What is canceled? What is canceled? The handbook, the handbook on, you know, situating labor and business and human rights. So, that we have planned for April 8. That stands canceled because it's too much of logistic work between, you know, the workshop and the Fair Finance event. So, we want to kind of do it on a later date, sometime in June or July at BIC. Yeah. So, I think I'll stop here. And any questions or comments? So, the guidance, the guidebook is still happening, but the launch is? The launch, yeah. The handbook will be ready by the end of April because it's a deliverable for the UNDP project. We are translating it into Kannada and Tamil as well, and it's going to take some time for that, yeah. Okay. If there are no questions, can we move? I have a doubt. So, I heard from Nikita that the handbook event has been canceled and it's going to happen online. So, is this like, is this true or is it actually going to happen offline in June or July? Because for fundraising, we were thinking of using that opportunity in many ways. So, I just want to be on that. Yeah. Actually, what we were hoping to do is to have, we have some underspending under the Fair Finance project, which we were hoping to possibly utilize for this launch event. We are still to get in touch with the Fair Finance team. But the launch, in any case, seems like a good idea, and we would, if not from these budgets, we would want to fund it from some other budget. So, because it was pushed down the year a bit, we thought we will first locate the budget and then, like, confirm. The format can be both, which can be online as well as in-person. We wanted to, you know, kind of de-link it with UNDP just to get, you know, a bit more breathing room, you know, to kind of do the launch in various formats and give some breathing space, because otherwise the logistics were getting a bit too much for us to, you know, to organize with the workshop and just right after the Delhi event. Yeah. I mean, I understand, like, there's a lot happening in April, other workshops. It's okay for it to be pushed in for June or July. But, like, an offline event is something which we will benefit more, like from our point of view. Yeah. The form of it, we can explore both. Yeah. Okay. Should I move on? Just to make a point, if we can internally come back on whether Fair Finance, yeah, Fair Finance also wants to kind of continue the work with us. I have asked them to kind of write an email. Shreya will get in touch with us. They were very impressed with the event. The way, you know, the response that we got to the event itself was largely appreciated. So, they do want to continue working with us. But it's also something that we want to come back on, how we want to develop, whether or not, you know, we want to develop work around BIS. So, on some of the, yeah, later. Okay. Moving on. This is anyway another topic that I would want to bring it up. We can discuss it now. I think it makes sense to discuss it now. If there are things that you feel came up in any of the support group, sensitivity group sessions. Already what was decided last time hasn't been kind of, I mean, we are, of course, bringing it up again. But a session with Gopika was decided to be had, who could talk to us about diversity, yeah, and inclusion. But if there are other topics, I think there might be one or two things that have come up in the SMT Slack channel. Yeah. Deepika, are you asking, like, whether something that came up during the discussions? Yeah. Okay. I think what I'll do right now, just in the interest of going through the meeting minutes first, and then we can have the discussions later. This is already an agenda point in the meeting. So, let's just leave it at that. There is no update on this matter. So, I'll move on. Is that okay? Yeah. There was a discussion on providing ILL team more support. And the action points have been listed at the bottom. If it helps, I can take you all there. Pradeep and Sonal, are there any updates from this? We did have one call with Perumal. So, we wanted to kind of do it on a monthly basis. Myself, Sonal and Rekha were part of the meeting. So, there I think we discussed some of the updates that Perumal wanted to share. So, he brought it up. And we also gave some inputs to Perumal. Basically, around how the work should be connected to the overall strategy of CividApp. So, some of the inputs that we gave was also about how systematically we should document the work that the team is doing. So, we discussed about coming up with a template to track the grievances and see what kind of pattern that emerges. And Perumal also mentioned that the project is getting extended to five more years. So, we also discussed that it is also time that we also give feedback to the Ajivika Bureau. Especially about... Right now, what we are seeing is that the team is also struggling. So, the focus is more on taking up more cases and addressing them. So, some of these discussions should also reflect there with Ajivika Bureau. I mean, the sustainability of it. Given that the informal sector is huge and the scale of the work also has its own limitations. Then, what we are trying to do and the sustainability of it. And how are we going to bring in the state mechanisms. So, is there a strategy to engage with the state to advocate and lobby with the state on this? It's something that we need to discuss with Ajivika at a higher level. So, Perumal and Sona were also saying that... I mean, the Ajivika... I mean, we were trying to do that in the discussion. But I think the space for that being limited within the group is something that was brought up. So, that's where it... I'm sorry, Pradeep. Is there a space within which group was limited? Yeah, yeah. I mean, Sona could add. So, there is a director level meeting that happens with Ajivika Bureau from different partners. As TVDEP is one of the hosting organizations, there are also other organizations. So, that seems to be a platform where all organizations kind of come together. So, I think there... I mean, Sona, you could add. We tried to raise it, but there seems to be less reception for that. Just one comment. See now, one need not wait for a platform. See, as a partner, we can raise it with a lead partner. We need not always wait for a... If you have a concern, then the lead partner, which is Ajivika Bureau, is also obliged to address that issue. It need not be in a platform. We need not wait for things to be discussed in the platform. If it is a serious issue. I mean, if it's just a functional issue and all those things, I can understand that it has to have a certain process, which is through the... If there are strategic questions and all, then I think we must directly approach the leadership of Ajivika. Just to add on to this and to clarify that during the director's meeting, which happened in December, we were more or less... I was very new to the ILL thing, and so it was more of hearing out what plans they have. And they were also sharing basically the overall national level updates with regard to each of the state facilitation centers, how they have been progressing. And also, since they were also planning to renew this partnership for... At that point of time, it was not sure of how many years. And later now, we have come to know that it is for a period of five more years. So, they were also wanting to share with the partners, the national team, on the roadmap ahead. So, it was basically that. So, there was no room for those kind of discussions. But in January, when the national team of ILL came for a field visit, that is when we got an opportunity to have face-to-face interaction and meet them and discuss about the progress updates with regard to outreach and case processing. That is where, informally, the ILL team... And I also was present in that meeting. The update is there in the S&T meeting minutes. So, that is where we got to actually check with the team in person as to what are the set processes in place when it comes to whether there are any SOPs in place when it comes to outreach. So, they gave us some inputs with regard to the strategy of how an outreach can be done. So, that part is clear. But when it comes to how to process the cases, there are monthly review meetings which are happening with each SFC. The ILL team is in touch with Ajivika and the national team. And there is a review which happens. But then it is more... I see that more as we are just receiving inputs from their side to do some target-oriented work. But it is not really... I do not know to how much extent. I am not a part of that monthly calls. But to what extent are we also providing feedback as to the challenges that we are facing and the need for having set processes and procedures or a chopped-out strategy for that matter. But what I could understand from those discussions in January with the national team of ILL is that there are no processes that they have also in place as of now. They also see that that is a challenge. And going forward, there is a need for it. But they did not have readily available answers to it. So, they also... will help. And maybe that is also one of the reasons they have not put any targets per se. They are just pushing on the outreach front to increase outreach. But when it comes to case resolution, they are not really putting any targets as such. They want the demand generation to happen, I think, more. But from our point of view, the closing of cases is also there. Because although there is no turnaround time specific that is mentioned in the project, at least I am not aware of it. But then there is the ILL team is whenever there is a case which is registered on the online platform, there is ILL platform in which they register the case. And they work towards closing of those cases. So, there is a need for having a set procedure for streamlining those processes. And as far as the continuity of the project is there, Vishnu from APU, from the funding organization, had visited ILL team and office last week. And after which Perumal has informed that this project is going to continue for another five years. And that Perumal had also mentioned that there is a lack of resource. One more person would add some more in speeding up of the processes in the SSC. And Vishnu has agreed to it. But these are all informal communication that has happened, nothing on the email. But Perumal has informed back to me, Deepika and Pradeepan, you were also there in that email. And they have gone ahead with advertising for this position under ILL. So, there might be one more staff which could possibly be funded through ILL budget. And what profile? You said that is a lawyer? No, no. So, that is a field for the outreach itself, field coordinator. But has the contract been signed? I have no idea. We have not received anything, Deepika, yet. No, no. I think it is called recruitment till the end. Yeah. Exactly. I mean that is what I had a word with Perumal asking, you have already gone ahead after this and we have not received the contract yet. So, he is saying that I have just put up because it will take some time, you know, till at least two weeks this job ad will be open. Until then he was thinking that the contract will be received. I was a bit surprised when the advertisement came. Yeah, exactly. So, I did speak to Perumal, you know, that you have already gone ahead with it because he just informed us and over the email also I had informed, I had, you know, sent a reply saying that let us wait for the contract to come. So, anyway, so… I think we just have to insist that this is an administrative sort of a procedure that we follow, that only after the contract is signed is the ad put out. So, let us not break that. We have five years. I do not see why we need to hurry the… Exactly. Yeah. There was no rush as such to, you know, act upon it. He felt that it is a limited kind of an offer. I do not know why Perumal felt that, you know… Can you convey this to Perumal? Yes, yes, yes. In the email I had clearly put out and that is also the reason why I was surprised that, you know, he had already acted upon it as soon as Vishnu had informed him. Yeah. But what are the ongoing sort of mechanisms that you all are keeping in touch with Perumal? One is a monthly call, Pradeepam, that is, that you all will continue? Yes, that Sona and I will be part of and one Rekha or someone from the SMT to be there. Okay. And other than that, if and when there is a director's meeting called by Ajitika, Sona will participate, right? Yes. This is largely the two ways in which we are hoping to support him more. Yeah. Even there is a, there was work around, you know, looking at inducting a labor advisor, legal advisor, sorry, legal advisor and legal counselor, but I think it was tall because partly it was the fees of that legal person was to be incurred through GIZ budget. So, since we were reviewing that component under GIZ, so this has also got stalled, but I think Pradeepam and Perumal and, you know, Gokul have already met this person, the legal person, right, Pradeepam? Yeah. And we are hoping to unfold, I guess. Yeah, I mean. Pradeepam, I mean, as long as it's moving, let's not, I mean, I am also conscious of that. Yeah, yeah. I think we should. If there are challenges or if there is something stuck somewhere. No, it's connected to GIZ work as well. So, once I think we are clear with a lot of things that we are doing in GIZ, I think then it should, because allocation under ILL is like very low, I mean, for this role. Okay. Then moving on. One minute. Yeah. See, now, see, it might be important to have a conversation with the Ajivika Bureau leadership, you know, because it has been extended to five more years. It doesn't mean that we are kind of strategically advancing, okay? See, kind of horizontally spreading more and more numbers, you know, may not answer the question, what Pradeepam talked about, you know. So, I mean, internally among us, you know, about kind of, you know, yeah, I mean, I don't want to repeat it. See, the state intervention, how do you ensure it? We don't have a mandate to kind of take action. We don't have inspectoral kind of powers. So, what is the sustainable model there, you know? So, that is steep. As a beginning, it looks good that, you know, that private organization is reaching out to workers for grievances. You know, I won't discuss it further, but there is an issue, and there is an issue of strategy, which we are seeing there. So, if we don't address it, and we just go on with the same activities in the future also, then the effectiveness might be an issue. Okay. Do you think, Sona, you can take this forward? Have you been in touch with the leadership at the RJVika Bureau? There has not been any communication as such, which has happened between the RJVika, you know, the management team per se, except for this interface of, you know, in January that we met for the ILL, National ILL team. But we can request for a meeting to discuss this, if possible. Yeah. You know, the issue is that, you know, see, for RJVika Bureau, for the entire project, you know, they cannot just rely on one group within a larger organization, you know. They have to relate to the leadership of the organization, the management of the organization in terms of strategy, you know. So, they must not just look at the Chennai ILL team as implementers. They are fine. But where is the strategy? You know, whatever is implemented, you know, where is the thinking about the strategy, the effectiveness of it, you know, the output that comes out of it. So, that is going to have to happen, you know. So, I mean, yeah. So, we need to communicate with them directly. I mean, not as if there is a problem. Not as if there is a problem. But we will require, I mean, we need to understand what is the strategy, what is the future. If they are struggling with certain strategy, then is there something that we can help with, you know. We are an organization with a lot of experience in these things. So, I think the point is that, you know, we have to make connection at the highest level, you know, with RJVika Bureau and present it as an opportunity. And we need to be more strategic about it. And we might be able to bring in something. And what they have in their mind as a future strategy, we need to understand. Yeah, I mean, since this is now going to be a beginning, once we receive the contract, we can definitely, you know, reach out to them with more details. And this is the planning phase, I mean, for the next five years. And this could set a tone. So, we can request for it. Just waiting for the contract to act upon it, I think. Or we could also reach out to them asking for the contract and, you know, and then open up the discussions. So, it is not the details that we want, okay. I mean, what we want to have is the kind of a strategy discussion, you know, which we have to have not just one-to-one. I mean, you can approach one-to-one, but a few more of us have to be involved in it. Yes, definitely. So, it is not just a contract, you know, but a kind of a strategy-level discussion, you know, which is not just surrounding the contract, okay, which is not about kind of a problem-solving of the contract. In the interest of time, I really have to move forward. Sona, if there are challenges in reaching out, let us talk about it. But this would be, it would be good to have a direct line with the leadership of Aditya Bureau. I would request everyone to make their interventions and inputs brief and high-level, not to go into the details, and flag if there are challenges. And I am sorry, I mean, maybe we have to look more closely at agenda setting to kind of cover everything in this time. We have till one, so I will rush through. This is, we also had a discussion on the Chennai office. And a subsequent discussion between me and Pradeepan was that probably because we were changing offices also in Bangalore, it would not be feasible. I mean, financially, we were thinking it would be good to stagger this. And so, I requested Pradeepan to kick off a joint meeting of the Tamil Nadu team, which also has not happened till now, like even once. I mean, it had not happened till then. After I spoke to Pradeepan, he has set in place one sort of a meeting. And that is a regular feature that we hope to continue. Do you want to give an update, Pradeepan? Yes, Deepika. So, the last meeting we had on 27th was in the context of the GIZ project because both Perumal and Kohila were also involved in the electronics work at different points. So, we brought everyone together to discuss the, I mean, to work out the action plan for the Workstream 3 of the project, that is worker engagement. But we also had a discussion about that we should continue this because everyone said, I mean, at least to me, everyone said that it is helpful that we meet on a regular basis and have discussion at the Tamil Nadu. Kind of have clarity on like what kind of discussion should it be because we also have this bi-monthly, no, quarterly meeting, team meeting, whether it should be to exchange updates from each project or should it be for a broader strategy for Tamil Nadu itself. Like one question was like reaching out to different CSOs, like even for leather sector, electronic sector, we are doing like separately. So, should it be connected to the broader Cividep strategy, like we were discussing about different things, geography level, solidarity building and so on. So, should it be aimed at that or to resolve like day-to-day issues that at project level we are facing are the questions that I have in my mind. But in general, I think it's a good idea to have this meeting so that we are connected and we are able to kind of help each other. Any specific inputs to Pradeepan's questions? I would imagine that the purpose of the meeting would be both and it has to be divided between these two sort of very specific interventions in dealing with challenges of the project teams as well as some discussions on a higher level topic that everyone is interested in. Not just interested in but is also invested in taking forward. And maybe just having these meetings regularly itself will give you a better idea of how to structure them. Any other? Sorry, I don't want to kind of cut down any bright ideas that can come. Please, comment if you have. Yeah, I will try to keep it going. And yeah, if there are challenges, I think I will again bring it back to the SMT. Thank you, Pradeepan. So, the discussion on the office we still hold for a bit and maybe next time we meet, we will talk about it. The training plan and its operationalization. I think there may have been some challenges in this or... Yeah, Sonal, please go ahead. So, there is no... I mean, it's not a very big challenge as I see because training calendar, I was not able to give in that much time during last month but then it is somewhat in place. So, this week I was... I'm hoping to send out some updates to the SMT with regard to, you know, I was thinking since we didn't have the briefing note for each of the topics coming in from the topic leads. So, I was planning to not really work on the entire training calendar for the year but maybe one or two quarters. So, so far I have got for... Let's say there are about 12 topics. So, around six briefing notes I have received. So, based on that, there could be a shorter, you know, a half yearly kind of a training calendar that could be drawn up. And there would be a need for, you know, some budget allocation through the projects, some of which is currently being looked at from the MAP Gender and Health Project where there is some allocation with FEMNET. So, we will have to... There is some... I'm already in touch with Perumal, Antony because they have a requirement for an external resource person when it comes to labor code but that is specific to, you know, regional level. So, I'm not sure whether FEMNET would be... If we put it as it is, they may not be interested because this should add on whatever they are approving as a budget under the capacity building budget under the project. It should cater back to the project capacity building, right? So, we will have to relook at it and once Kaveri is back from her leave, we will have to look at it as per what is FEMNET's requirement. So, maybe a six monthly plan will be drawn up and I've already spoken to Gopi sir since, you know, this topic was... He was ready with the topic. So, to do it in the first week of April itself but since we were all tied up with looking at the staff meetings and other things, so didn't pursue it further. But I think by April... Because we are here in this team, have you received... Okay. Have you received responses from the senior management team themselves? Because I know... Not all. Not all. So, from your side, from Rekha and Pradeepan. Pradeepan, from your side also, yeah. Pradeepan, go ahead. Yeah, I mean... Yeah, I mean, I had a look at the training calendar. I mean... I think... Looking at the event calendar, like, you know, the kind of events that we are doing and... I mean, I feel like it's a little heavy or... My sense is that it should be further kind of simplified. I mean, in terms of... I'm talking from the feasibility point of view because last year also we came up with a plan but largely due to lack of time and also resources, we couldn't... I mean, largely in the context of Stitch, we tried to have these, but we couldn't... I kind of foresee that problem here as well. So, whether we should boil... I mean, I don't know. You mentioned 12 topics, Sona. I feel like it's kind of like too much for a year. So, maybe like bringing it... Bringing the numbers down might kind of enthuse people, but... Yeah. See, one point is that we might have to relook based on that we only have now three quarters remaining. So, we will have to look at it from that and only put priority topics. So, you can have a relook at it and suggest for which topics would be more relevant. It was already circulated earlier. So, depending on that, you can just... I can circulate it again. Sure. So, we can come up with only the priority topics because I think... Before we arrive, maybe we can hear out Gopinath and Rekha. Yeah. Yeah. See, as a plan, it is good. Okay. Now, I don't see a need for kind of simplifying whatever, whatever, you know, because many of the subjects are covered. Now, the problem is about time, you know. So, I think, you know, we must not wait for a perfect sequence and a perfect context. Okay. What we need to do is the kind of the low-hanging fruits kind of approach where you kick off with what is almost ready. Don't worry if there is no full attendance. We cannot wait for everybody's participation. So, if there is a reasonable number of people who can confirm, go ahead and we have to start and at the moment we'll gather, you know. I mean, that's all. So, let's not wait for a perfect kind of a plan. Totally. So, by this weekend, by before this weekend, I will be sharing a draft plan at least for this quarter. It's not for this quarter. Sorry. Yeah. We'll wrap it up. Sure. Sure. I think, you know, some informal conversations, you know, from what, you know, some of their, I think, impressions I have got is that one is prioritization. You know, it kind of looks, it's a full calendar. So, prioritizing what might be the immediate, you know, topics that we can cover which also comes across probably in most projects. I don't know how to kind of, you know, prioritize it. One idea would be, you know, what are those topics that are reflecting in most projects and also, you know, as an organization, what we need to pick up including the labor codes. I think labor codes do not reflect in most projects but it is something that, you know, we might want to kind of put our, you know, time and energy behind. And I think two is, can we get external source persons? I think there is a sense that, you know, with the amount of work that people have, also kind of, you know, nominating their names for leading sessions. It is something that, you know, probably, yeah, colleagues are finding it a bit much. So, wherever possible, of course, wherever possible, if some of us can nominate ourselves, that's good. But wherever possible, if we can get external source persons, that's probably one suggestion, you know, that, yeah, I mean, one impression that, you know, I have received. Yeah, but Lekha, what happens is, you know, the process of finding an outside person itself is very, very torturous, you know. And, see, that is best done when we have a person-to-person meeting, you know. Then the person has time to come and talk to people and all those things, you know, but this online session, fixing somebody and all, it becomes very problematic. Yeah, I agree. Lots of conversations, you know, you have to talk to them, you have to get them to present, a lot of communication. So, I mean, they are good, you know, when we have an in-person thing. Some sense that, you know, we can make it at least look like it's a bit more informal, because it just looks like, you know, there is a lot to cover. And, you know, generally that, you know, people will have to kind of give more time to it. Is there a way that we can communicate that, you know, it is a bit more informal and it is, you know, it is coming together of, you know, just meeting of ideas and discussion. Yeah, yeah. That's a very important point. You know, Lekha, that's a very important point, because it can be very, it can look very formidable, you know. Overwhelming, you know, to be completely prepared to have a one and a half hour session or something. It can be a few pointers. And exactly this point that, you know, we come together, don't worry about, you know, having a perfect presentation and everything, you know. Two or more topics, and we also are looking at what is our experience, you know. We are also looking at the experience, a bit of conceptual understanding, not a teaching kind of a mode, you know, but sort of a issue-based discussion mode, you know. So we can also make it a little clear to people that you need not kind of spend hours together, you know, preparing for it, but a more informal, that is the word, a more informal kind of a discussion is what we are looking at. Yeah, so in that context, I think I would also expect that the senior management team then reaches out to Sona. With the topics that have been assigned to them, whether they feel this is feasible to carry out or not, either way it's fine. But I think, Sona, we want to at least hear back from all of us. Yeah, but see, if we frame it the way that Rekha said, you know, it's easier for people to facilitate, you know. True, but many of the topics are quite technical, so we will not be able to completely fit. Yeah, I mean, yes, you know, but even the most technical part, you know, VRS, you know, what is it? Many in the team will not know what is it, you know. What is the full form of it? You know, why are we talking about it? Why do we do it? What is the logic of doing something like this? You know, fair finance, you know, what is it? We don't have to say a lot about it, you know, to get into the details. How is it connected is all we know, you know, and some curious questions will come. And then, you know, and then, you know, whoever is working on this topic, you know, try to answer those curious questions. So, it's an attempt at slightly raising the level of curiosity, wanting to understand a little bit, you know, not getting into too much of the technical aspects. Yeah. Okay, I think we'll only have gone through the previous meeting minutes by the end of this. No, no, I'm not saying that. No, no, but if you are getting stuck, you know, if you are getting stuck about something, you know, we better discuss it, you know. Yeah. These are helpful points. All of these are very helpful discussions. I think Sona also has a better idea to carry forward because otherwise these pieces then tend to languish and yeah. I think, yeah, just to add on that, let's kick off this training session. At least, you know, at least one or two because there are some two or three which are there in the pipeline. So, if we just start off with this, then we'll have a better idea how to approach it further. Yeah. So, this month we will see one training session at least. Yeah, we don't have to follow just one model and we are not doing that. You know, see, somebody might use a more informal method. Somebody might be very, very, very kind of, you know, very planned and very. So, it doesn't matter, you know. Thank you, everyone. Discussion on CCC's withdrawal from Fairway Foundation. I think we had additional discussions around this, but I'm not fully clear where. And again, the idea that came back was that we need to further kind of examine the work of MSIs and sharpen our critique of the MSIs in general. And on this particular matter also, it will just help us to kind of study what exactly has gone on between these two organizations. We've had some reactions from Fairware as well. CCC is a partner and CCC reached out to us before making this final decision. After the decision was made final and conveyed to Fairware, Fairware, we also heard the Fairware side. So, there are sort of arguments on both sides on why this is a good idea and why this is a bad idea. I think for CBTEP, it would be just good to, like, build capacity to understand these issues better. And this falls within my, like, assigned topic on the training program and several other threads that have also been, like, you know, the discussions in Stitch and how to get ETI to collaborate more and the critique of, yeah. So, this is something that I'm hoping to take forward in the training sessions, and I will write to you soon about this. Yeah, I think, you know, just one thing for me. In May, there is the Fairware board meeting, you know, and the board, I mean, the chair, I mean, Alexander has invited CCC for a one-to-one meeting with them. For me, it was surprising that, you know, they haven't had a one-to-one meeting before they took this decision, you know. A partner of 20-odd years, you know, and then you don't have a, yeah. I mean, that's a bit surprising, and though it was not surprising for Fairware, Fairware has a very strong view that, you know, this is not going to help the workers' cause, you know. This is like fighting each other, you know, and when there are other stronger forces, you know, one, yeah, they think that the process is, Fairware thinks that the process is not helpful, you know, for the broader cause. So, there is more to it than what we have discussed, you know. So, see, Fairware expects some kind of a, some kind of a, what shall I call it, you know, some kind of a statement or something from us as partners of both organizations. They are not really asking us to intervene, but at least, you know, make it clear from both perspectives. To very simply put, for us, it is important that the campaign organization continues to campaign, you know, and brands are targeted for whatever, you know, dragging their feet and whatever. On the other hand, you know, we also know that Fairware's work is slow, you know, but there are some positive, with all criticisms, there are also some positive points. So, what do we, what are we really saying, you know? So, maybe we are now pressed to, we can't keep quiet, you know, we can't say, okay, both of you are fine, you know, so much is happening, you know, we are not concerned. So, we need to have a bit of a more clearer kind of a stance. Are you saying that you need this before you see them in May? Ideally, yes. Okay. You know, otherwise, you know, we have not spoken, that's all. Otherwise, you know, we have kept quiet. Like, you know, I don't know, I don't remember all the communication that we have. How did we respond to CCC? I don't remember that. What was our response to CCC? There was no, like, yeah, there wasn't much engagement with it. So, they, sorry, they consulted. But then did we respond? Did we say, okay, this part of what you say is right, or this part, we haven't said. So, we can't afford to be, we can't afford to be only beneficiaries of both organizations and not be engaged in this, in this issue. And we don't have all the information or we have not analyzed it sufficiently. Not going into the actual debate of the pros and cons of all of this, let's pause that for another meeting. But just that there should be a response. There ought to be a response from us. What I suggest is, you know, since maybe Deepika, you, Rekha, and me have been more conversant with both organizations, you know, and the probable, whatever, you know, repercussions, I don't know, whatever. See, we don't know. I mean, we don't know the Dutch context so much, you know. I mean, they cooperated. But why is the problem? We know some of the problems with MSIs, you know. We have experienced that. So, we have only partial kind of analysis of the issue. So, I think, you know, it is best if we, three of us, discuss this further, especially focusing on CCC's critique. And then we decide, you know, what we can do. I mean, like, we need not decide now, you know, about what we want to do. Do we want to send a common letter, you know. What do we want to do? We can discuss. One is this, the immediate action of responding, because we are partners with, you know, both organizations. But I think, you know, internally, you know, to kind of zoom out and make sense of our stakeholders. You know, who are our stakeholders? What is, you know, what is their approach to improving working conditions? And what is, you know, what is our approach? Making sense of our politics internally, I think, is something that is, you know, a sense-making of it is required. At what point do we collaborate? And what is it that we stand for? And what is the, you know, what is the point at which, you know, we will, you know, have objections? That internal, you know, kind of sense-making of different stakeholders is possibly that something that, you know, we might want to have some kind of informal discussion, you know, when we have this capacity building within the organization. Who are private actors? You know, who constitutes private actors? How do we engage with them? What is the point at which we collaborate? What are the interests we put forward? Where do we not? What is the point at which, you know, we retreat? Similarly, with MSIs, you know, similarly with campaign organizations, it's important to have some kind of, you know, this sense-making. So, let's move on. Because you both are in office, I am sure, today. I mean, I have just one response to that. You know, see, that is definitely important. See, when you are engaging in a partnership, if you are broadly on the same side, you agree to work together. I mean, we will look, what are we looking now? Is it safe for us? Is there a high risk? And if none of those things are, and if it is from broadly from the same side, you know, which is in support of workers, we go along. We don't get into a long analysis of the organizational risk. We don't do it. You know, we get into partnerships. See, now that, you know, we have had partnerships for over 20 years, you know, and when there is a crisis, you know, now the important thing is to understand this both very good. But then we need to have a response, you know. So, we cannot say that, you know, okay let us understand it over whatever period of time. See, it is assumed that we understand. The assumption is that, you know, when we partner with an organization, we agree with them. So, we need to deepen that understanding. We need to understand the conflicts. But the immediate thing required is to have a task. Okay. I will just answer both after this meeting. And, I mean, agreement with both, I think there has to be a concrete immediate response, but also a deeper understanding of MSIs as a partner and networks as a partner. Yes. So, this topic on the formal submission to Professor Suryadeva, that we couldn't take it forward. We may, yeah, we have actually passed the deadline as well. But I didn't push it further because I thought that he said that maybe he has more time in the position. And we could maybe subsequently use another call for input. And, yeah, I don't know how to take this forward, whether to do it or not. That is still an open question right now. So, if you all feel we can have a little bit more preparation time and, yeah, deliberation time for this. But if there is interest and someone volunteers, if they can track this particular thread, that would be great. Yeah. Or if there are thoughts on why this might be important or not. Yeah, please go ahead. I mean, my sense is, you know, if it comes just as a call for input, we might not take it up because of work priority. But if we can talk in a broader approach, we want to kind of engage, you know, with UN rapporteurs and make it part of, you know, some of our policy work. Then, you know, then it kind of aligns with the overall approach that we want to take where policy is concerned. And then we can pass that, you know, engagement with UN rapporteurs is something that, you know, we need to kind of engage more with. And then the whole operational approach will come. But if it's just a one-off input, it is, you know, we are likely to kind of do this. Yeah. Any other strong feelings about this? Thoughts? Opinions? So then we can talk about whether this is helpful to take forward. I'm moving on. Okay, the SP process, I mean, we did have a meeting planned, but which we had to cancel. We have to have it soon. What we have otherwise gone ahead and done is Rekha has worked on the strategic plan document and Sandhya is looking at it now for editing. The next step is to actually discuss this with the board and get their final sign-off on it, which then kickstarts the board development process there. But here we will continue to then, you know, take it back to the team and see how to operationalize the document. So that's where we are at this Saturday. We will have a formal sort of review and sign-off if everything goes well. Yes, I couldn't see how the process was a bit hurried, but just, yeah, I think it's better to have that and instead of trying to have a COVID document, which I think will take more ages to come up with. Yeah. Yeah, the other thing was that in the process of writing this SP document, we actually were able to, I was able to dig out strategic plan documents dating 2013, 2015, 2018. Documents which we probably had like collective amnesia of. I am so surprised that it didn't come up through the entire year and a half long process. But it was still helpful to look at them and, yeah, compare where we are. I think, yeah, maybe in the operationalization of it, it gives me a lot of food for thought on how to take it forward. How to keep it in the memory of everyone and how to keep talking about the strategic plan. Yeah. Y'all will all have copies of all of these documents. I think y'all may already have it in the version that was sent to y'all. The older documents are hyperlinked. Yes. Waiting for the weather to get a little better and then we will sort of set the dates. Okay. I don't know how else to plan it. We have a six-month window period with the facility. Okay. So, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.